Initial Thoughts and Questions
The rapid development of technology and virtual life has lent itself to myriad questions and interpretations within different halachic frameworks for 21st century orthopraxic Judaism. The general basis of these questions are neither new nor radical in their approach to the halachic process, but the moment of exception brought about by the COVID-19 pandemic has pushed what was once legal theory and experimentation into a necessary reality of response and action that has today's Judaism navigating a virtual wilderness of Jewish law and spiritual meaning. This resource; part tshuvah, part study guide, part giant question mark, is one response to the new normal of "streaming Judaism." Here's hoping that it helps us find some footing as we journey on together!
Questions:
1) How do we "show up" for a Judaism that exists online?
2) In the absence of physical connectivity, how do we maintain and cultivate kahal / community?
3) How do we express our reluctance for this situation while simultaneously accepting and owning it as our reality?
(סג) וַיֵּצֵ֥א יִצְחָ֛ק לָשׂ֥וּחַ בַּשָּׂדֶ֖ה לִפְנ֣וֹת עָ֑רֶב וַיִּשָּׂ֤א עֵינָיו֙ וַיַּ֔רְא וְהִנֵּ֥ה גְמַלִּ֖ים בָּאִֽים׃ (סד) וַתִּשָּׂ֤א רִבְקָה֙ אֶת־עֵינֶ֔יהָ וַתֵּ֖רֶא אֶת־יִצְחָ֑ק וַתִּפֹּ֖ל מֵעַ֥ל הַגָּמָֽל׃ (סה) וַתֹּ֣אמֶר אֶל־הָעֶ֗בֶד מִֽי־הָאִ֤ישׁ הַלָּזֶה֙ הַהֹלֵ֤ךְ בַּשָּׂדֶה֙ לִקְרָאתֵ֔נוּ וַיֹּ֥אמֶר הָעֶ֖בֶד ה֣וּא אֲדֹנִ֑י וַתִּקַּ֥ח הַצָּעִ֖יף וַתִּתְכָּֽס׃
(63) And Isaac went out walking in the field toward evening and, looking up, he saw camels approaching. (64) Raising her eyes, Rebekah saw Isaac. She alighted from the camel (65) and said to the servant, “Who is that man walking in the field toward us?” And the servant said, “That is my master.” So she took her veil and covered herself.
Questions for Reflection
1. What is the definition of the word "La'Suach" in pasuk 63?
2. How does this definition differ from the English translation provided?
3. What is significant about this difference and how does it change not only the passage but the narrative as a whole?
אמר רב אדא בר אהבה היתה חבילתו מונחת לו על כתיפו רץ תחתיה עד שמגיע לביתו דוקא רץ אבל קלי קלי לא מאי טעמא כיון דלית ליה היכירא אתי למיעבד עקירה והנחה סוף סוף כי מטא לביתיה אי אפשר דלא קאי פורתא וקמעייל מרשות הרבים לרשות היחיד דזריק ליה כלאחר יד
Rav Adda bar Ahava said: One who was traveling on Shabbat eve and his package was resting on his shoulder as night fell, he runs beneath it, i.e., with his package on his shoulder, until he reaches his home. The Gemara infers: Specifically one runs until he reaches home; however, walking a little bit at a time, no, he may not do so. The Gemara asks: What is the reason for this? Since, when walking in the usual manner, he has no conspicuous reminder that it is Shabbat, there is concern lest he come to perform the acts of lifting and placing by stopping to rest on his way home. The Gemara asks: Ultimately, when he reaches his home, it is impossible that he will not stop and stand a bit, and at that point, he will have performed the prohibited labor of carrying the package from the public domain into the private domain of his house. The Gemara answers: This is referring to a case in which he does not place the package in the typical manner when he reaches his home. Rather, he throws it down ke-le-acher yad [lit. like with the back of the hand]
Questions for Reflection
1. What does this phrase *like with the back of the hand* mean in this gemarah?
2. What is the halachic significance of this statement?
כלאחר יד - שלא כדרך זריקה כגון מכתיפיו ולאחוריו
Not in the normal manner of throwing; for example: from his shoulders and behind him.
מתני׳ המוציא בין בימינו בין בשמאלו בתוך חיקו או על כתיפיו חייב שכן משא בני קהת כלאחר ידו ברגלו בפיו ובמרפקו באזנו ובשערו ובפונדתו ופיה למטה בין פונדתו לחלוקו ובשפת חלוקו במנעלו בסנדלו פטור שלא הוציא כדרך המוציאין:
MISHNA: One who carries out an object into the public domain on Shabbat, whether he carried it out in his right hand or in his left hand, whether he carried it in his lap or on his shoulders, he is liable. All of these are typical methods of carrying out an object, as this was the method of carrying the sacred vessels of the Tabernacle employed by the sons of Kehat in the desert. All labors prohibited on Shabbat are derived from the Tabernacle, including the prohibited labor of carrying out from domain to domain. But one who carries an object out in an unusual, backhanded manner, or with his foot, or with his mouth, or with his elbow, with his ear, or with his hair, or with his belt [punda] whose opening faced downward, or between his belt and his cloak, or with the hem of his cloak, or with his shoe, or with his sandal, he is exempt because he did not carry it out in a manner typical of those who carry.
מתני׳ הכותב שתי אותיות בין בימינו בין בשמאלו בין משם אחד בין משתי שמות בין משתי סמניות בכל לשון חייב [...]
MISHNA: One who writes two letters on Shabbat, whether he did so with his right hand or his left, whether they were the same letter or two different letters, whether he did so using two different types of ink, in any language, he is liable. [...]
גמ׳ בשלמא אימין ליחייב משום דדרך כתיבה בכך אלא אשמאל אמאי הא אין דרך כתיבה בכך אמר רבי ירמיה באטר יד שנו ותהוי שמאל דידיה כימין דכולי עלמא ואשמאל ליחייב אימין לא ליחייב אלא אמר אביי בשולט בשתי ידיו
GEMARA: The Gemara questions the beginning of the mishna: Granted, for writing with the right hand let one be liable, as that is the typical manner of writing. However, for writing with the left hand, why is one liable? That is not the typical manner of writing. Rabbi Yirmeya said: When the mishna taught that one who writes with his left hand is liable, they taught it with regard to one who is left-handed. The Gemara asks: And if so, let his left hand have the same legal status as everyone’s right hand; for writing with his left hand, let him be liable, for writing with his right hand, let him not be liable. Rather, Abaye said: This mishna refers to an ambidextrous person, who is liable for writing with either hand.
Questions for Reflection
1. What can we learn from these discussions?
2. How does this principle work? Any examples of how this is used in a modern context?
3. How can this concept help us in our present situation (not just in a halachic sense, but also spiritually?)
How to Do Nothing: Resisting the Attention Economy, Jenny Odell
[...] Diogenes practiced something closer to performance art. He lived his convictions out in the open and went to great lengths to shock people out of their habitual stupor, using a form of philosophy that was almost slapstick.
This meant consistently doing the opposite of what people expected. Like Zhuang Zhou before him, Diogenes thought every "sane" person in the world was actually insane for heeding any of the customs upholding a world full of greed, corruption, and ignorance. Exhibiting something like an aesthetics of reversal, he would walk backward down the street and enter a theater only when people were leaving. Asked how he wanted to be buried, he answered: "Upside down. For soon down will be up." In the meantime, he would roll over hot sand in the summer, and hug statues covered with snow. Suspicious of abstractions and education that prepared young people for careers in a diseased world rather than show them how to live a good life, he was once seen gluing the pages of a book together for an entire afternoon. While many philosophers were ascetic, Diogenes made a show of even that. Once, seeing a child drinking from his hands, Diogenes threw away his cup and said, "A child has beaten me in plainness of living." Another time, he loudly admired a mouse for its economy of living.
Concluding Questions
1. Let's go back to our first text. How can we use Yitzchak as a paradigm of a different kind of shinui?
2. How can we emulate this difference?
3. What does that look like in the age of the attention economy?
4. What can emotional / spiritual shinui look like and how can we incorporate it into our Jewish practice?